I have just purchased this camera with the kit lens. What would you recommend as a second lens? I am a casual photographer , mainly family, vacations
18314
My recommendation would be the 55-200. You can't really go wrong with any of the fuji lenses as a second lens. But the 55-200 gives you a solid two lens combo.
18315
I purchased the 56/1.2. What an amazing lens! I have a blast with the portraits now I am able to take. Another great prime lens would be the 23/1.4. I don't have it since I have the X100s as well. My last Fuji lens is the 55-200. Very sharp, well built lens. Took it on an air show and was able to take great, sharp photos on fast moving jets and airplanes. Can't go wrong with it.
382374
I have both lenses and they are both pretty good. I probably like the 50mm a bit more than the 35mm. The real question for you to answer is what will I be my primary use for the lens ? Remember, we're shooting with a crop-sensor camera, so the lenses convert from a 35mm to a 52mm, and the 50mm converts to a 75mm lens. My recommendation for General Purpose Shooting would be to go with the 50mm ! A great bang for the buck and terrific bokeh !
1421742
if you are asking about bokeh, then you will not be satisfied with the kit lens. the kit lens is extremely sharp with fast focusing but lacks in bokeh. i use a zeiss 50 1.5 with a leica adapter as my regular point and shoot setup and shooting it at 1.5 gives me great bokeh but it's a manual focus setup. if you have to have auto focus then i would look at the other lenses but the kite lens is not for you.
910058
Photofun123-I am in a similar situation. What did you decide on and what do you think of it? I will be getting a 50d and only one lens. My main subject will be my toddler. I am considering 24-70 and 24-105. Thanks.
155322
I had an EPL2, the II kit lens and the wide angle lens, which twisted on for the right fit. My suggestion is to buy the II because the wide angle is that good, inexpensive and sure is useful. What to do the I lens? either keep it, give it away or sell it.
2279391
I would compare it to my smaller camera as a 10x zoom for the really good zoom go up to the next lens, I loved my photos at the Grand Canyon, Walking around I used the 30-110 and to zoom in on the river aprox 1 mile below I used my bigger lens 110-220, I like the polarize filter, It is great for outdoors, no glare and crisper color, email if you need more details
774987
Hi Mr. Hewitt (I wonder if we have any relation?) Anyway, for a true beginner (as in you've never used anything but a point-and-shoot) I'd recommend you get a Nikon D40 and an 18-200 VR. Keep the 18-55 kit lens, you'll find it lighter when your just taking snapshots of the family or whatever. The D40 is an excellent starter camera, it has almost all the tweaks of this much more expensive camera without the weight and cost. The D300 has many advantages over it, but I really feel you'll learn a lot faster with a simpler camera, and step up to this when your ready. I actually started out with a D40 a bit over a year ago, it made starting out quite fun. The 18-200VR will follow you as a great lens on the D300 too, and you can use any newer AF-S lenses on it. If you have older AF-D Nikon lenses lying around that you want to use, a D80 is also a good place to start. It's easier to make the custom tweaks you'll learn about in your photography classes on the D80, but it still has Auto modes as well to get you started. Checkout www.kenrockwell.com, especially his recommended camera page. He's a bit more eloquent than I am. And I wouldn't be so fast to recommend the D60 to anyone, it's just the D40x's guts (plus active D-Lighting, but without the other enhancements of the D300/D3) with a different name stamped on it. I wouldn't recommend the D40x or D60 to anyone, they exist to fill a price point to compete with Canon. If your eyeballing either, jump to the D80 and don't look back.
2251842
My nikon kit came with similar lenses. I have found, as others have, that this is my "usual" lens and the others have become more special use lenses. It just gives more capacity at once whereas the others have innate limits. I find the image quality equal and satisfactory.
1907928
I am sorry - I did not even investigate the kit lens. I had a 24-70 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 which I was going to use with the camera. (But I opted for the 24-70 2.8 rather than the f4 because I do a lot of indoor work (I am NOT a pro), and am VERY happy. I recently shot at a conference with high ISO and both these lenses, without a flash. Very pleased with the results).
364835
Basically just more distance. In my opinion, i never ever use the kit lens, so get the cheaper one and get a couple primes with much much better quality. Thats just my opinion. Honestly, just watch some reviews and based off what kind of photography you're doing its your call!
46360
May I ask what lens you went with? I am debating the same issue. Thank you.
876153
No problem :) Have a nice day, if you get the lens, enjoy it!! O love it :)
1703577
Thanks Michael for sharing your experience. I myself ended up buying a 60d with 18-135 lens kit about a week ago from amazon and I am very happy both with the body as well as the Lens. I had a T2i with 18-55mm before this purchase, and I am not a pro but so far i haven't seen any degradation on the image quality between the two lenses. I like the 18-135 for its decent quality and a very practical zoom range. Not to mention that 60D is a far better body than T2i.
1183760
For me, a big selling point was the 16-50mm f/2.8 (weather resistant) lens and weather resistant body. I knew I would be out when photographing nature stuff and it might start raining. Plus the f/2.8 lens is spectacular and you get a $200 discount when buying is as a kit.
724507
Hey Barbara,I would definitely try one a little sturdier. I have this one now on a lighter Nikon (D7000) and primarily use a smaller lens (18-105) and I think it is about at capacity and maybe a little under-qualified. Just one man's opinion but I think something more robust would suit your very nice set up better.
392884
OK, well here are my thoughts on the kit lens. It is lighter, so for backpacking orhiking it could be a really good thing. As you say, it is only an extra $75 or so,so there isn't much wrong with having it along with a truly fine lens, unless $75makes or breaks your budget. Get the kit lens AND as many other lenses asyou can justify.
312927
I've recently purchased a Sony A6000. I've added, in this order, the 16mm-70mm zoom, and the 12mm, 32mm Touit lenses. The 16mm-70mm impressed me so much that I decided that the Touit prime lenses would probably offer even better picture quality. I can only say that I have not been disappointed. I do find that the 12mm and the 32mm do sometimes "hunt" a little on focusing. I understand that they do not take full advantage of the Sony A6000's focusing technology. There have been some long term promises that firmware upgrades would be coming, but from what I understand Zeiss has not come up with any. The 16mm-70mm does not "hunt" on focusing nearly as much. From the many e-mount reviews I have read there are of course less expensive options by sticking with Sony brand, or Sigma brand lenses. I suppose it all depends how deep your pocket is, and what kind of photography you are pursuing. All I can say that the pictures I've taken with the three Zeiss or Zeiss/Sony (16-70mm) have great contrast and sharpness. If the kit lens is satisfactory then of course stick with that. But, for me I probably would have just stuck with my Fujifilm X20 or new X30 as the standard lens on those cameras do a great job and offer decent speed and photo quality.